Vodafone TERRIFIED of iPhone - Seeks Restraining Order!

"Ness-Net" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Just more of the same, lame fiction.

catch me back in 5 years... you'll then say ****! ... OXFORD WAS RIGHT!

trust me Ness, I've seen all this before... many times...

Apple always disrupts static, non-functioning markets, then takes all.

-

---

› See More: Vodafone TERRIFIED of iPhone - Seeks Restraining Order!

Oxford wrote:

> "Ness-Net" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>Just more of the same, lame fiction.
>
>
> catch me back in 5 years...


Better idea: hold your breath and let's see what happens.

No cheat-breathing, now, Oxie-moron. Hold it.

Oxford <[email protected]> wrote in news:linuxlovesosx-
[email protected]:

> "Ness-Net" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Just more of the same, lame fiction.
>
> catch me back in 5 years... you'll then say ****! ... OXFORD WAS RIGHT!
>
> trust me Ness, I've seen all this before... many times...

Bull****.

>
> Apple always disrupts static, non-functioning markets, then takes all.

More bull****. Other than the mp3 market, Apple is a third rate player in
EVERY other market they do businees in.

>
> -
>

Oxford wrote:
> Those are the only 2 choices for the next several decades.

Two decades??? Hell, the iPhone will be obsolete, MORON.

"Oxford" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Ness-Net" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Just more of the same, lame fiction.
>
> catch me back in 5 years... you'll then say ****! ... OXFORD WAS RIGHT!
>
> trust me Ness, I've seen all this before... many times...
>
> Apple always disrupts static, non-functioning markets, then takes all.
>
> -
>

OK...... I'll NOT be holding my breath in the mean time.

Here's the deal..... the market is FAR from "static" and functions
VERY well. Therefore, your suppositions aren't based on any facts.

Therefore, they are completely false.

Oxford wrote:
> Apple always disrupts static, non-functioning markets, then takes all.

Always???

Lets see....

1) Apple III computer, circa 1980 - overheating problems.

2) Lisa - Thousands buried in a landfill for a tax credit.

3) SJ's Next computer - never found a market, until Apple bought it.

4) Power Mac Cube - Shelved within a year after it was introduced.

5) Apple Cyberdog - It was a dog.

6) Taligent - Dead after a few years

7) EWorld - Dead after two years.

8) Pippin - Couldn't compete with Sony Playstation, Sega Saturn and
Nintendo 64. Less than 45,000 sold.

9) 20th Anniversary Macintosh - Discontinued after one year, could the
$7,499 price been a factor?

10) Macintosh Portable - The $6,500 price killed it off.

11) Newton - The "future of computing". Six year life.

12) Puck Mouse - No one could figure out which end was up.

DTC <[email protected]> wrote in news:ADL0j.492$Vq.290
@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com:

> Oxford wrote:
>> Apple always disrupts static, non-functioning markets, then takes all.
>
> Always???
>
> Lets see....
>
> 1) Apple III computer, circa 1980 - overheating problems.
>
> 2) Lisa - Thousands buried in a landfill for a tax credit.
>
> 3) SJ's Next computer - never found a market, until Apple bought it.
>
> 4) Power Mac Cube - Shelved within a year after it was introduced.
>
> 5) Apple Cyberdog - It was a dog.
>
> 6) Taligent - Dead after a few years
>
> 7) EWorld - Dead after two years.
>
> 8) Pippin - Couldn't compete with Sony Playstation, Sega Saturn and
> Nintendo 64. Less than 45,000 sold.
>
> 9) 20th Anniversary Macintosh - Discontinued after one year, could the
> $7,499 price been a factor?
>
> 10) Macintosh Portable - The $6,500 price killed it off.
>
> 11) Newton - The "future of computing". Six year life.
>
> 12) Puck Mouse - No one could figure out which end was up.
>
>
>
>
>

You forgot Apple TV.

CozmicDebris <isheforreal> wrote in news:Xns99EEBBE9BB7B8isheforreal@
216.196.97.142:

> DTC <[email protected]> wrote in news:ADL0j.492$Vq.290
> @nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com:
>
>> Oxford wrote:
>>> Apple always disrupts static, non-functioning markets, then takes all.
>>
>> Always???
>>
>> Lets see....
>>
>> 1) Apple III computer, circa 1980 - overheating problems.
>>
>> 2) Lisa - Thousands buried in a landfill for a tax credit.
>>
>> 3) SJ's Next computer - never found a market, until Apple bought it.
>>
>> 4) Power Mac Cube - Shelved within a year after it was introduced.
>>
>> 5) Apple Cyberdog - It was a dog.
>>
>> 6) Taligent - Dead after a few years
>>
>> 7) EWorld - Dead after two years.
>>
>> 8) Pippin - Couldn't compete with Sony Playstation, Sega Saturn and
>> Nintendo 64. Less than 45,000 sold.
>>
>> 9) 20th Anniversary Macintosh - Discontinued after one year, could the
>> $7,499 price been a factor?
>>
>> 10) Macintosh Portable - The $6,500 price killed it off.
>>
>> 11) Newton - The "future of computing". Six year life.
>>
>> 12) Puck Mouse - No one could figure out which end was up.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> You forgot Apple TV.
>

And the Motorola ROKR, a joint project betwwen Moto and Apple

And Macintosh TV

Paul Miner <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 16:56:56 -0700, Oxford
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>"Ness-Net" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Just more of the same, lame fiction.
>>
>>catch me back in 5 years... you'll then say ****! ... OXFORD WAS RIGHT!
>>
>>trust me Ness, I've seen all this before... many times...
>>
>>Apple always disrupts static, non-functioning markets, then takes all.
>
> Like the Walkman? Oh wait, that was Sony. I can't think of an Apple
> example.
>

No- it was the flat screen hi-def market! Oh, wait... that was everybody
BUT Apple.

Never mind.

CozmicDebris wrote:
>> You forgot Apple TV.
>>
>
> And the Motorola ROKR, a joint project betwwen Moto and Apple

I didn't mention the ROKR as he would have diluted Apple's failure as a
Motorola thing.

Nor the Apple TV as he would have said I never gave it a chance to fly.

DTC <[email protected]> wrote in news:LFM0j.1053$Dt4.621
@newssvr19.news.prodigy.net:

> CozmicDebris wrote:
>>> You forgot Apple TV.
>>>
>>
>> And the Motorola ROKR, a joint project betwwen Moto and Apple
>
> I didn't mention the ROKR as he would have diluted Apple's failure as a
> Motorola thing.


But wait- Apple always sets the terms and makes the rules. Remember?
Motorola would have been at the mercy of the might Apple.

>
> Nor the Apple TV as he would have said I never gave it a chance to fly.
>

But Apple Products don't need time to fly. Apple goes in and changes the
face of industries with their cutting edge technology.


Wow- I've been listening to his crap for too long if I can recite it back
that quickly.

CozmicDebris wrote:
> But Apple Products don't need time to fly. Apple goes in and changes the
> face of industries with their cutting edge technology.

Spoken like a true Oxturd sockpuppet.

JUST JOKING ! ! !

In article
<[email protected]>,
Oxford <[email protected]> wrote:

> > Vodafone did not ask the court to stop T-Mobile from selling the iPhone,
> > Gordon said.
> > Vodafone would like to see a court eventually mandate that T-Mobile sell an
> > unlocked
> > version of the iPhone for the same or less as today's locked version, he
> > said.
> >
> >
> > http://www.pcworld.com/businesscente...protests_tmobi
> > le
> > _iphone_sales.html
> >
> > I don't think I've ever seen someone (Oxford) more consistently full of
> > ****.
>
> Yes, but from a LEGAL perspective Vodafone is TERRIFIED of losing
> customers to the iPhone,
What can you show us to support that Vodafone is terrified?

> so they are trying to open up holes so they can
What can you show us to support that they are acting specifically
against iPhone and not other competition?

> obtain revenue from the iPhone without committing to the future.
How does Vodafone get iPhone revenue?
How does that prevent them from a commitment?

> No handset maker can now compete in the Cell Market against the iPhone,
> that's a pure fact.
In what way? To everyone else in the entire world, there are many
competitors, doing very well. Using ANY metric of any kind, iPhone is
one of many hundreds of choices, and it is clear to everyone else that
people will continue, mostly happily, to buy other ones.

> Apple has too many patents on the future, so
Apple has many patents on specific technologies that are in iPhone.
That's common -- most companies own patents for their techs. Since no
one has to replicate exactly what iPhone has in it, the patents only
mean that Apple is protected from exact copies. They aren't protected
from just all innovation.

> everyone must either bow down to Apple or go out of business.
Show us one way this is true.
Even assuming everyone HAD to copy the iPhone, there are many ways to
do many things. A little cleverness might manage.
But obviously they do NOT have to copy the thing -- they just need to
make better products, not the same thing Apple has.

> These are the facts... cell carriers and handset makers must face.
They are not facts, and that's one of your problems. They are OPINIONS
based on your extremely narrow view of what is going on and what is
needed in the industry. Plus, your incredibly shallow appreciation of
what iPhone is about that makes you think it's so unique or wonderful
that everyone must have one.

> Do a great deal with Apple to carry the iPhone, or disappear.
You seem to be missing a lot of major facts:
Apple isn't looking for multiple carriers. No one gets that choice, in
the short term. It's done. Over. Kaput. Everyone that isn't selling it
now has to find other handsets (there are MANY fine ones!) to sell and
promote.
Haven't you noticed they continue to do that, and are doing just fine?

> Those are the only 2 choices for the next several decades.
Your sure your really narrow, extremist view is so amazingly certain
that it predicts many decades of the future? That's idiotic!

In article
<[email protected]>,
Oxford <[email protected]> wrote:

> great, but you are missing the point that the current iPhone is just the
> slightest tip of the product iceberg.
Well, it's the beginning of a product line. We see the second already.
There is no reason at all to assume there is a complex line of products
behind it.
More to the point, everyone else int he entire industry is ready to
compete -- you can imagine more iPhone models, why can't you also
imagine more models from Samsung, Motorola, Nokia, etc.?

> Apple has 20-30 designs on their 3D imager right now
You want to demonstrate where you got that number?
You use a number, YOU have to prove it. Prove that there are
specifically that many designs at Apple, and that the number is
relevant compared to what others are developing.

> and is fine tuning
> them as we speak to match the larger Cell Market. You'll see 8 to 12 new
> models of iPhones within 36 months.
Prove this, too -- it flies against everything Apple has said.
Are you seriously claiming to have more accurate information than what
Apple has said about it?

> That's just how Apple operates... always bettering themselves since
> there is no outside competition.
Stupid and wrong -- Apple has always had competition. In every field.
Apple's skill is in making excellent products do specific things well.

> So, don't focus on the great first iPhone and say it's the last.
No one did -- but EVERYONE else is smart enough to know they can't make
statements about how the future models are selling, and about how badly
the competition stacks up, and about how whole markets fold in spite of
all evidence. Everyone else is smarter, see?

> Simply look at the Monochrome 5GB iPod sold at $399 in 2001, then look
> at the iPod Nano 8GB sold today in Walmarts across the world.
That shows what? That Apple wil upgrade models?
That's assumed. But it doesn't mean that they will always beat the
competition by that amount.

> Apple has only opened up 7 outlets for the iPhone, and it's been a
> massive success. 90x times more popular than the original iPod!
Largely _because_ of the iPod popularity, and therefore not scalar.

> The iPod now sells at upwards of 47,000 locations...
Um... didn't you just describe channels, and now are talking about
locations? isn't the number of locations huge already?

> The iPhone will follow the same successful path.
Except Macs have shown us that sales locations mean very little.

"Mitch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:201120071908516607%[email protected]...
> In article
> <[email protected]>,
> Oxford <[email protected]> wrote:
<snip>
>> and is fine tuning
>> them as we speak to match the larger Cell Market. You'll see 8 to 12 new
>> models of iPhones within 36 months.
> Prove this, too -- it flies against everything Apple has said.
> Are you seriously claiming to have more accurate information than what
> Apple has said about it?

sure, oxford claims stuff like that all the time- like he claimed that apple
had hit 1.25million iphones sold in the first two weeks of sales, even after
they said they were hoping for 1million in the first quarter. oxford
basically claimed they were playing coy. ;D

<snip>